Comments on: Much Ado about XULRunner http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/ Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:04:07 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Sans Browser » Blog Archive » Super Add-Ons: The Firefox 3 Proposal http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2231 Sans Browser » Blog Archive » Super Add-Ons: The Firefox 3 Proposal Mon, 21 May 2007 11:21:11 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2231 [...] Adobe Apollo falls right into this category. There is this thought that shared runtimes are the boogey-man. But think about it, there are successful internet-savvy shared runtimes that exist right now and [...] […] Adobe Apollo falls right into this category. There is this thought that shared runtimes are the boogey-man. But think about it, there are successful internet-savvy shared runtimes that exist right now and […]

]]> By: Leslie W http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2230 Leslie W Mon, 21 May 2007 08:08:25 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2230 Oh and I added your XUL Explorer to the mozdev list of XULRunner apps: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/XULRunner_Hall_of_Fame Seems like it'd be a good idea to keep that list fresh if MozFo would like to attract some more developers :) Oh and I added your XUL Explorer to the mozdev list of XULRunner apps: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/XULRunner_Hall_of_Fame

Seems like it’d be a good idea to keep that list fresh if MozFo would like to attract some more developers :)

]]> By: Leslie W http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2229 Leslie W Mon, 21 May 2007 08:04:34 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2229 Ah, Ben responds here: http://benjamin.smedbergs.us/blog/2007-05-15/xulrunner-what-we-are-doing/ I got the "less than one developer" idea from the last Mtn View Moz developer day. It is true that many many many people have contributed to Mozilla-as-platform, and it's good to remember this. And while I do have C++ jitsu enough to hack on something like XULRunner, after having fun coding Ruby for the last few years, going back to C++ and XPCOM feels like, well, something ohso unpleasant. why's HacketyHack, for example, is built on Gecko rather than XULRunner, as he thought XULRunner would just complicate the issue and force him to jump through XPCOM hoops. I do think HacketyHack is a good example of an app that ought to be really easy to build on top of XULRunner (with a Camping backend and a few widgets and fancy canvas elements), and yet doesn't seem to be just yet. Ah, Ben responds here:

http://benjamin.smedbergs.us/blog/2007-05-15/xulrunner-what-we-are-doing/

I got the “less than one developer” idea from the last Mtn View Moz developer day. It is true that many many many people have contributed to Mozilla-as-platform, and it’s good to remember this.

And while I do have C++ jitsu enough to hack on something like XULRunner, after having fun coding Ruby for the last few years, going back to C++ and XPCOM feels like, well, something ohso unpleasant.

why’s HacketyHack, for example, is built on Gecko rather than XULRunner, as he thought XULRunner would just complicate the issue and force him to jump through XPCOM hoops.

I do think HacketyHack is a good example of an app that ought to be really easy to build on top of XULRunner (with a Camping backend and a few widgets and fancy canvas elements), and yet doesn’t seem to be just yet.

]]> By: Leslie W http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2228 Leslie W Mon, 21 May 2007 06:56:39 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2228 I'm curious though, how does less than one developer on XULRunner (last I heard) add up to Mitchell's claim that "The Mozilla Foundation will continue to invest significant amounts in XULRunner [and the Mozilla platform]"? Anyone have details to share? I’m curious though, how does less than one developer on XULRunner (last I heard) add up to Mitchell’s claim that “The Mozilla Foundation will continue to invest significant amounts in XULRunner [and the Mozilla platform]”?

Anyone have details to share?

]]> By: OffBeatMammal http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2205 OffBeatMammal Thu, 17 May 2007 06:17:40 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2205 I've had a play at putting a Silverlight control into XULrunner (http://blog.offbeatmammal.com/blogs/obm/archive/2007/05/17/silverlight-in-xulrunner.aspx) to see what would happen. The basic idea works but I need to dig into what XULrunner can do a bit more so any hints or suggestions most welcome ;) I’ve had a play at putting a Silverlight control into XULrunner (http://blog.offbeatmammal.com/blogs/obm/archive/2007/05/17/silverlight-in-xulrunner.aspx) to see what would happen.

The basic idea works but I need to dig into what XULrunner can do a bit more so any hints or suggestions most welcome ;)

]]> By: Home of KaiRo: XULRunner, Mozpad, and SeaMonkey http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2196 Home of KaiRo: XULRunner, Mozpad, and SeaMonkey Wed, 16 May 2007 14:25:49 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2196 [...] Mozpad, and SeaMonkey Our Planet lately has been full of XULRunner talk. And this is good, as it clearly tells that there's wide support of that technology, [...] […] Mozpad, and SeaMonkey Our Planet lately has been full of XULRunner talk. And this is good, as it clearly tells that there’s wide support of that technology, […]

]]> By: rebron.org » XULRunner http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2193 rebron.org » XULRunner Wed, 16 May 2007 07:31:18 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2193 [...] Much Ado about XUL Runner [...] […] Much Ado about XUL Runner […]

]]> By: rebron.org » the xulrunner pipe dream http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2192 rebron.org » the xulrunner pipe dream Wed, 16 May 2007 07:00:34 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2192 [...] much ado about xulrunner [...] […] much ado about xulrunner […]

]]> By: Mark Finkle http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2188 Mark Finkle Mon, 14 May 2007 20:01:26 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2188 mig - "Making XR significantly easier for people to use than it is today doesn’t have to take a massive amount of effort and doesn’t have to be ignored as an option." I agree completely and will be contacting you guys and others about how to do it. mig -

“Making XR significantly easier for people to use than it is today doesn’t have to take a massive amount of effort and doesn’t have to be ignored as an option.”

I agree completely and will be contacting you guys and others about how to do it.

]]> By: Mark Finkle http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2187 Mark Finkle Mon, 14 May 2007 20:00:31 +0000 http://starkravingfinkle.org/blog/2007/05/much-ado-about-xulrunner/#comment-2187 Ian - I would also love to see XULRunner ship with Firefox 3 and be shared so other applications can use it. But, I also know that a shared, system-level XR is not the holy grail. I have been through DLL hell on Windows for over a decade. Whether its RichEdit control or MSHTML or ODBC or whatever, something usually got out of sync and screwed an application. The same thing could happen to a shared XR. Its not a show stopper! Small applications would really benefit from a shared XR, but larger applications will need the "safety" of a separate runtime. The lack of a shared XR should in no way diminish the power of XUL/JS/XPCOM as a platform. So give your presentation on the greatness of XUL as a platform with a clear conscience! Ian - I would also love to see XULRunner ship with Firefox 3 and be shared so other applications can use it. But, I also know that a shared, system-level XR is not the holy grail. I have been through DLL hell on Windows for over a decade. Whether its RichEdit control or MSHTML or ODBC or whatever, something usually got out of sync and screwed an application. The same thing could happen to a shared XR. Its not a show stopper!

Small applications would really benefit from a shared XR, but larger applications will need the “safety” of a separate runtime. The lack of a shared XR should in no way diminish the power of XUL/JS/XPCOM as a platform. So give your presentation on the greatness of XUL as a platform with a clear conscience!

]]>